googologywikiaorg-20200223-history
User talk:84.61.172.74
why the hell do we need that category? it's gonna be like 90% of the wiki you're.so. 20:06, April 22, 2014 (UTC) :I second that, as who would need to know whether a number is a power or not? Also, it'll be more like 50% of the wiki, considering all of Bowers' and Saibian's numbers. WikiRigbyDude (talk) 23:55, April 22, 2014 (UTC) Believe it or not, there are surprisingly less number of non-perfect power googologisms than you think. The following are examples of perfect powers: * Numbers defined using BEAF: They are based on exponentiation. * Numbers defined using Extensible-E System: The vast majority of Saibian's numbers. * Illion numbers: They have the form 103n+3. Combined with BEAF numbers this marks the majority of Bowers' numbers. * Hyperfactorial array notation, from n!1 and onwards: These are based on exponential factorial. This marks the majority of Hollom's numbers. * Numbers defined using Steinhaus-Moser Notation: They have the form nn. * Graham's number, and its derivatives like forcal. The following examples are largely not perfect powers: * Numbers based on (plain) factorials, such as googolbang and Trigrand Faxul. * Prime numbers (not included in the category). * Repdigit numbers, such as those based on hypermathematics and copy notation. So the category is not as bad as you think. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 01:32, April 23, 2014 (UTC) :GG Cloudy, never thought of all that. WikiRigbyDude (talk) 02:48, April 23, 2014 (UTC) :touché. but still, how necessary is this category? you're.so. 05:43, April 23, 2014 (UTC) ::@FB: I think this category is a good idea. ::@84.61.172.74: I'm not sure about the numbers smaller than 1,000 whether they should be in te category or not, since it will be about 50% of them and no-one would consider that interesting, I think. ::Wythagoras (talk) 15:06, April 24, 2014 (UTC) User:FB100Z/Croutonillion Why shouldn't User:FB100Z/Croutonillion be added to the categories Category:Illion and Category:Uncomputable? -- 06:42, May 3, 2014 (UTC) :Beacause they are article categories. It is just not meant for that. Wythagoras (talk) 06:44, May 3, 2014 (UTC) Why is User:FB100Z/Croutonillion an uncomputable -illion number? -- 18:04, May 14, 2014 (UTC) :Croutonillion is not a number, it is just a mix of definitions which is "supposed" to represent a number. But in fact, "meameamealokkapoowa oompa" appears in definition, and it is not a number, thus Croutonillion is ill-defined too. By the way, there is a difference between ill-defined numbers and salad numbers. Croutonillion is an example of namely ill-defined number. A salad number is something like this, through I'm not sure what is major googolplex. Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ ) 19:09, May 14, 2014 (UTC) Note that the very last rule, one below all rules, says that Croutonillion is 10^(3X+3), which is the definition for -illion numbers. It's considered uncomputable because of heave use of Rayo's function and Busy Beaver function, which are uncomputable. LittlePeng9 (talk) 19:41, May 14, 2014 (UTC) :some asshole tried to change it to 10^(8X + 3) a while back you're.so. 22:09, May 14, 2014 (UTC)